Council deficit
Today the Councillors were told that the shortfall for next year (and this before the real deep cuts kick in) of £2m.
Given that the perceived wisdom (sic) was that it takes 6 months to implement any cuts, that means a 1% saving in the first six months and about 3% in the last six.
These are deep cuts, especially where the major cost is payroll.
And it will only get worse, before it gets better.
Suggestions for cost savings; other than taking the bacon roll van to the COU rather than Mohammed MacLeod to the mountain?
Given that the perceived wisdom (sic) was that it takes 6 months to implement any cuts, that means a 1% saving in the first six months and about 3% in the last six.
These are deep cuts, especially where the major cost is payroll.
And it will only get worse, before it gets better.
Suggestions for cost savings; other than taking the bacon roll van to the COU rather than Mohammed MacLeod to the mountain?
9 comments:
Get rid of the people at the top and give the workers of each dept the chance which one's should go thats the one's that are costing the council most money not the other way round.
These are deep cuts, especially where the major cost is payroll.
Deep cuts but not difficult. Freeze council pay and make redundancies. As most people who don't work in the council can see, there is a lot of fat in the council at all levels. It has to be done. No commercial enterprise would have the luxury of six month's grace to make a spending cut decision. Most of these things have to be decided and implemented within weeks or else the bank pulls the plug. Well guess what? We are the bank and it is about time that we pulled the plug on our council's squandering.
How much does a Councillor cost?
Salary: bottom end £15K say average £20K
On costs: Pension, Travel and susistance etc: £10K p.a.
Best guess: £30K p.a.
Reduce Council from 31 to 12
Saving: £600K +/-
Well at least a third of the deficit
Now about 3 or 4 senior untalented and mis employed managers at £60-70K say £100K with on costs
Another £400K +/-
Benefit other than 50% of the savings needed?
No Actual Reduction in the Effectiveness of the Working element of the council
Next:
Get Managers to do their job - NO more consultants to do it for them.
Saving:
Another £1M
There you go £2M saved, no loss of jobs at a lower level where job loss is devestating and NO loss of effectiveness.
Job Done - proper Job
That's proper Bo, 8:13! When do you start?
The Council do not dictate the nuber of Councillors it employs and do not decide their salary so no saving there. Rule of thumb 1 top numpty = salary for 4 officers.
Looks like the council have decideed to save some dosh by turning off their nameservers. Interesting choice for savings ;)
For the non-techies amongst us, I think Eddie means "their website is down" and "they have disconnected the server that runs it from the internet".
No doubt some iffy consultation has been opened and closed whilst the servers are *down*
The words brewery and piss-up spring to mind....
Please see 'Council Tendering Processes' below lots of good ideas on how the council can save money - mind u why would they - we will forward the blog to the consultant who will be employed to look at cost cutting!!
Another idea Mr B or Mr C look in the real world to see how normal people run businesses, imagine it was ur own money your 'playing' with & that you need to provide for your family (may not be possible I know - having never had a REAL job in the REAL world.
10.17 You are right in all respects other than the redundancies. All UK council workers - ours included - have some very attractive contractual redundancy terms which far exceed the private sector.
The cost of making the average arsehole redundant (together with three months' notice) rises staggeringly for long-service and senior buffoons.
Ever wondered why there's so many of them? They're too costly to get rid of and no-one wants gigantic redundancy payments on their watch.
Post a Comment